Ridenbaugh Press/Northwest

No great shockers in the final closeout of candidate filings in Idaho – which ended at 5 p.m. today.

The closest thing to actual news on the last filing day probably was the announcement from former 1st District U.S. Representative Bill Sali, who had not enturely ruled out running for another term, that he will not, and will instead endorse state Representative Raul Labrador for the position. As indicated, no big surprise there, but that endorsement does clarify a bit further which portions of the Republican Party that Labrador and front-runner Vaughn Ward are appealing to.

The other U.S. House seat, which had lacked for a Democratic candidate, has gotten one in the form of Mountain Home resident Mike Crawford. All three congressional seats do have at least one Democrat filed for the office.

And Republican incumbent Mike Simpson will face not just two but three challengers (which statistically should advantage Simpson). In the 1st District, Democrat Walt Minnick has no primary opposition, for all that he has irritated many of the party faithful.

There are 11 candidates for governor. That’s a lot.

There are no Democrats running for lieutenant governor, state treasurer or attorney general.

In Idaho’s 105 legislative seats . . .

Republican incumbents (there are now 80) are seeking re-election in 77 seats. (Senate 28 – all of the incumbents are seeking re-election, House 49 of 52). Incumbent legislators, Republicans especially, have had a strong track in Idaho in the last couple of decades.

Democratic incumbents (there are now 25) are seeking re-election in 18 seats. (Senate 5 – incumbents Kate Kelley and Clint Stennett are opting out, House 13 – incumbents George Saylor, Anne Pasley-Stuart, James Ruchti and Donna Boe are retiring, and Brandon Durst is running for the Senate). Put it this way: Republicans have more than four times as many legislative seats as Democrats do, but more than twice as many Democrats (in raw numbers) are not running for re-election. What does that suggest about Democratic gains in the legislature this year?

Republicans have filed for 102 of the 105 seats – they are conceding three seats (those held by John Rusche of Lewiston, Wendy Jaquet of Ketchum and Elaine Smith of Pocatello). Even by recent-cycle standards, that’s a strong showing.

Democrats have filed for 59 of the 105 seats – conceding 46 of them.

There are, we should note, procedures (such as primary election write-in) which could allow the parties to fill some of those vacancies. And likely some will be filled that way; it happens. But these numbers should give you a pretty good picture of how this election year is shaping up in Idaho.

Back in August 2007, Idaho Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter held forth on the idea of coping with rising demand in the state for prison space, by using the wizardry of the marketplace, so business “can go out in the marketplace and kind of work their magic.” And Corrections Director Bent Reinke was quoted in the Spokane Spokesman-Review as saying, “There’s a desire by both the board of correction and the governor’s office to have Idaho’s next prison be privatized.”

Ridenbaugh Press long has been skeptical of the usefulness of private prisons. It’s been a recurring theme here since before the Idaho Correctional Center opened near Kuna in July 2000; our prediction then was that a private prison in Idaho would be (we remarked on this before a contractor was named) a scandal waiting to happen.

Ten years later, at the ICC managed by the Corrections Corporation of America, here’s the opening shot in the American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit:

ICC is an extraordinarily violent prison. It is known in Idaho as “Gladiator School” for a reason. More violence occurs at ICC than at Idaho’s eight other prisons combined, and the unnecessary carnage and suffering that has resulted is shameful and inexcusable. ICC not only condones prisoner violence, the entrenched culture of ICC promotes, facilitates, and encourages it. Indeed, ICC staff cruelly use prisoner violence as a management tool.

Violence is epidemic at ICC for a host of reasons, including the fact that the Defendants turn a blind-eye to it; they fail to adequately investigate assaults and therefore are unable to fashion effective remedial measures to prevent assaults from recurring; they refuse to discipline the guards whose malfeasance precipitated prisoner violence; they frequently place vulnerable prisoners with predators; they fail to protect prisoners who request and need protection from assault; and ICC is understaffed, inadequately supervised, and guards are inadequately trained.

The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution prohibits the imposition of “cruel and unusual punishments.” This means, the Supreme Court has recognized, that prison officials have a duty “to protect prisoners from violence at the hands of other prisoners.” Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 833 (1994). In other words, people are sent to prison as punishment, not for punishment. “Being violently assaulted in prison is simply not part of the penalty that criminal offenders pay for their offenses against society.” Government officials “are not free to let the state of nature take its course” in America’s prisons. The administrators of ICC are ignoring this constitutional duty, resulting in wholesale fear, intimidation, and violence within the prisoner population.

ICC is owned by the State of Idaho, was built with tax funds, and is located on public land. However, ICC is operated (for a profit) by Corrections Corporation of America pursuant to a contract with the Idaho Department of Corrections (IDOC). Plaintiffs request, among other things, that IDOC be ordered by this Court to set strict deadlines by which ICC must develop adequate policies, and hire and train a sufficient number of guards, to reasonably safeguard prisoners from assault, and that if ICC continues to ignore its duties under the Eighth Amendment, the Court should order IDOC to remove all Idaho prisoners from this excessively violent and inhumane facility.

Such a magical marketplace. The suit points out the difference between privately-run and state-run prison facilities: “Until recently, ICC housed approximately the same number of prisoners as does the Idaho State Correctional Institution (ISCI), nearly 1,500 men. Yet, during 2008 and 2009, three times as many prisoner-on-prisoner assaults occurred at ICC as at ISCI. Recently, new housing units were opened at ICC, and ICC now houses approximately 2000 prisoners.” And: “The number of assaults actually occurring at ICC is considerably higher than reported, perhaps three times as high. For one thing, ICC deliberately fails to document many assaults. For another, many victims of prisoner assault choose to conceal the incident out of fear of reprisal by prisoners for being a “snitch.” Continue Reading »

Idaho public officials have been jumping at the opportunity to pull in F-35 military aircraft, which would be based at Gowen Field at Boise. One indicator has been the Idaho Legislature, which passed (House unanimously, the Senate on voice vote) House Joint Memorial 10, urging the planes be based there.

That would lead you suggest that the proposal – which does have its downsides, notably some very loud noise across a good deal of Boise – is overwhelmingly popular. But that may not be right.

Take a look at the forum on the subject at the Idaho Statesman web site – the comments are running decidedly in opposition. A number of commenters suggested that Mountain Home Air Force Base, about 35 miles away, might be a more suitable location.

One commenter: “I retired from the Air Force 6 years ago. One of the reasons I came here is because there are no jets! If they fly F-35’s out of Gowen Field it will be heard everywhere in the valley, not just around the airport flight paths. If they do a ground engine test at 50% you will hear it in Idaho City. In England, the Air Force was sued because F-111s were rattling the old churches apart in towns miles away. In New Mexico the F-15’s were causing Cows not to milk as much – that’s what the farmers said anyway. My parents live near Eglin AFB, FL where the city of Valpariso just sued the Air Force not to put F-35’s there. The F-35’s are the loudest Air Planes I’ve ever heard. Think straight exhaust without any muffler or baffler and multiply it by a thousand.”

Monday candidate filings for office in Idaho yielded a few nuggets worth note here:

There are now two Democrats filed to take on Republican Senator Mike Crapo, so he won’t be unopposed again in November as he was six years ago. But which will it be? Tom Sullivan of Tetonia, an unknown factor in state politics? Or maybe a guy who did get some headlines a few months back: William Bryk of Brooklyn, New York?

There’s a Supreme Court contest: Justice Roger Burdick is being opposed by 2nd District Judge John Bradbury. Loads of hard feelings lie in back of this one. In 2008, Bradbury ran against and came very close to ousting Justice Joel Horton. Last year, Bradbury was the subject of a complaint that he didn’t live enough in his formal county of residence, Idaho County – a complaint the Supreme Court snarkishly upheld (in which we view as one of its weaker recent decisions). And there’s more back of all this. Could be lots of snark unloaded in this one between here and the May primary. [Note: Corrected to refer to Bradbury, rather than Burdick, as subject of a complaint.]

Only a few more Democrats filing for the legislature. Maybe notable: In Idaho Falls, Jerry Shiveley, who in 2006 became the first Democrat elected to the legislature from that area in decades, won a central-city seat, which he lost in 2008, and now is filing for again.

It’s gotten a good deal of attention in Idaho, some in Washington and a little in Oregon. But from any of those angles, Idaho Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter’s “Love Letter to Our Neighbors” merits a little thought.

The core of it is business solicitation, specifically going after businesses in Oregon and Washington which are seeing their states raise taxes, while Idaho is not: “We now are reaching out to hundreds of Oregon businesses, and will do the same with those in Washington if the legislature there follows Oregon’s lead. We aren’t offering many bells and whistles, but what we can offer is a business-friendly State government, a highly qualified and motivated work force, and communities where people understand that while government cannot be the solution to their problems it can and must be a champion for their own solutions.”

On Monday, Otter wrote that “Last month, for example, Oregon voters approved their legislature’s decision to raise taxes on the wealthy and on many businesses by $727 million. The immediate result was that my phone started ringing – and so did phones over at our Department of Commerce. It seems that word has spread about our Project 60 initiative, and that we are open for business, including theirs! The businesses that have called are emotional about this subject, and they have every right to be. Rising costs – especially during a recession – could put some employers out of business, or at least prompt layoffs. More than 2,000 Oregonians joined a Facebook group to protest the tax increase and commiserate about the repercussions. No less an Oregon business icon than Nike’s Phil Knight calls it ‘Oregon’s Assisted Suicide Law II’.”

On Tuesday, Washington Governor Chris Gregoire fired back. She said that “I’m not an expert on Idaho,” but pointed out “It looks like they have a corporate tax of 7.6 percent, a sales tax of 6 percent, an income tax ranging from 1.6 to 7.8 percent,” she said. Washington doesn’t have an income tax (though it has a comparable business and occupation tax), and its sales tax isn’t a lot higher. She mentioned (as she often does) the Forbes business rankings of states: “We’re now the second best state in the country and they went from seventh to 11th. They’re going down in the rankings. Regulatory environment we’re ranked 5th, they’re ranked 35th. You get my point?”

(Otter’s letter refers to studies ranking Idaho lower in tax rates than the others. Note to all: If you want to go state tax-survey shopping, you’ll find you can get whatever ratings you want if you look hard enough.)

Oregon’s officials by and large haven’t expressed terrific concern over this, though House Republican leader Bruce Hanna of Roseburg (who opposed the tax measures) did say in an Oregonian opinion piece today that “As a business owner, I recently received a letter from Idaho Gov. Butch Otter inviting me to bring my company and my jobs to his state. Although I have no intention of leaving Oregon, I’m deeply concerned when other states and cities are actively courting our businesses.”

A whole lot of posturing going on. But is any of this likely to make much difference in terms of business opens, closes or moves?

Not likely. Continue Reading »

UPDATE He has: Otter filed for re-election this (Friday) morning. What follows may still be food for thought, though.

This post may be rendered useless speculation tomorrow or next week, and odds are it will be. Can’t help posting it, though, just because it seems to shine some light on a political dog that didn’t bark in the night-time. [see edit at end of post]

That would be C.L. “Butch” Otter, the governor of Idaho who is widely expected to run for a second term. He has nowhere said he won’t, has indicated he will, and has six filing days left to do it. But when asked about his campaign, he has sounded reluctant to the point of diffidence. Yeah, odds are he will.

But it’s quite a contrast with the last cycle for the office, when Otter, just re-elected in 2004 to the U.S. House, made clear he wanted to run for governor. Hardly had his re-election to federal office been certified than he was on the run, the happy warrior doing everything he could to lock down at least the Republican nomination for governor. Then-Lieutenant Governor Jim Risch, who also wanted the job, was simply out-maneuvered, and in November 2005, after strongly suggested he was in the race, dropped out. It was the logical move: Otter had moved very aggressively to sew it up.

Compare that to this cycle: What looks very like an oh-I’ll-get-around-to-it sort of approach, almost an unwillingness. The contrast couldn’t be much greater.

So what if Otter – and the decision is singularly his – decided: To hell with this garbage everyone insists on putting me through? What if he decided not to file?

What a fun time we’d have. Well, some of us. Continue Reading »

Monday was a deluge, the rest of the week a trickle, in Idaho candidate filings. That’s not unusual; the pace doesn’t ordinarily pick up again until near the end, which is a week from tomorrow.

No posts on this the last couple of days because there wasn’t a lot to say – the fitful filings have been mostly as expected.

Following up on a Kevin Reichert post yesterday, though: The bulk of the legislature does seem to be running for another go-round.

Unless my count was somehow side-tracked, I’m now counting 82 current legislators having filed for another run at the legislature. That includes Democrat Anne Pasley-Stuart in District 19, currently a House member running for the Senate seat, but not Senator Nicole LeFavour, who plans to swap offices with Pasley-Stuart, but hasn’t yet filed. o you can bump that up to 83.

Since there are just 105 legislators, and since six more filing days (out of a total of 10) remain, that gives good odds the next legislature will, as Reichert suggested, closely resemble this one.

There is also this:

Total number of legislative seats (out of 105 total) for which Democratic candidates (including incumbents) have filed so far: 20. Seats for which Republicans (including incumbents) have filed: 79.

Some of them, anyway. This is the first official day of campaign ‘10 in Idaho, because it’s the first day candidates were allowed formally to file for office. (In Oregon, they’ve been doing it since last fall.) A good many of them did that on Day 1, but the deadline for filing isn’t until a week from Friday.

The names listed so far on the sheet released twice-daily by the secretary of state offers no big surprises so far. The biggest Day 1 splash was the filing by Democratic gubernatorial candidate Keith Allred, and three others – Republican Rex Rammell, independent Jana Kemp and Libertarian Ted Dunlap – also filed for the office. But the incumbent, Republican C.L. “Butch” Otter, who generally is expected to run, hasn’t shown yet.

No U.S Senate candidates yet (Republican incumbent Mike Crapo hasn’t turned in yet), but both U.S. House incumbents have filed. And while no one is in yet for lieutenant governor or superintendent of public instruction (where both incumbent are expected to run), the incumbent secretary of state, controller, attorney general and treasurer all filed their papers, and all were unopposed (as of the end of day 1).

Nothing yet by way of judicial challenges, though a couple have been rumored.

If my count is right, 49 of the current 105 legislators have filed for re-election – close to half on day one, a strong showing. But (will this hold up?) only a few challenges, primary or general, materializing as yet.

More as it comes.

As energy providers look around for new sources of electric power – wind gaining special popularity in the Northwest – here’s one that could be highly useful and available all over the region:

Tapping into methane gas found at landfills, and converting it into energy.

The Kootenai Electric Cooperative, based at Hayden, is planning to use methane gas emerging from the Fighting Creek landfill. The Spokesman Review quotes its marketing manager as saying, “We have a unique situation here, which makes this a wonderful project. We have fuel in close proximity to the power lines. Basically what we’re doing is putting a generator in between the two. So it’s very economical. The power will go right to the power lines.”

That may be a better-than-average situation, but it probably could be managed at many other locations as well. There’s a neat efficiency to the concept, and useful environmental cleanup alongside.

Money decisions are where your priorities hit the road. Talk is cheap; when you decide how money is allocated, you’re putting something closer to your true self out there.

That seems to be hitting home with Idaho state Senator Nicole LeFavour, D-Boise, who is a member of the legislative budget committee but not part of its operative majority. Watching the committee slice away at the state Department of Health & Welfare, she responded with a blog post unusual (among legislative blog posts) for its pungency.

Unlike with education budgets yesterday, none of the affected parties were brought in. No stakeholder meetings were held with the disability community, with people with chronic illnesses or with the hospitals, clinics, doctors and nurses to see if this would work out. No, we have handed down a fly by the seat of your pants budget full of intent language acknowledging that it may fall apart by January. And if it does it seems that’s ok because January is after the elections.

Fred Wood, maker of the motion, leader of the heartless, had the lack of sensitivity to mention going home as he wove his committee debate this morning there under the grand columns and the domed, cream colored ceiling. This is about going home. Passing this fly by the seat of our pants budget is about going home, not about us as law makers governing or leading or taking seriously our duty to do more than just make the numbers pan out.

Now we will watch the waiting lists grow and we know already that slowly the process is bogging down. Already the Department of Health & Welfare (whose employees are often some of the lowest paid in the state) already they close down half a day every other Friday without pay. Now they will close a whole days, close whole field offices so people if they have a car must drive and wait and perhaps still not get served, still not make it to the front of the line for help for a child, for food or something to get them through now that unemployment has run out.

Representative Wood, the scowling man with the mustache and thick glasses glaring over his microphone said we HAD to cut this budget as we did. He knows as well as I do that a single change in the grocery tax credit would fix this… He knows well that we could vote for one year not to give $40 grocery tax credits to Idahoans earning more than $20,000 a year ($40,000 for married couples.) The whole committee knows that this one simple $35 million change could prevent us from losing $120 million in federal funds and could have completely prevented us from making all these cuts in the Health Assistance budget this year.

There are other options too, such as increasing the number of tax auditors. (The conservative hosts of the Monday Twin Falls radio program where I guest during sessions wonder why that hasn’t been done, and it’s a good question.) Or – God forbid – actually find a way to raise revenue.

But that’s not the priority.

Mike Gwartney (left) and Butch Otter at a check presentation/Office of the Governor

The hottest person of controversy in Idaho right now may be not the governor, C.L. “Butch” Otter, but the director of the Department of Administration, Mike Gwartney. Though many of Gwartney’s critics evidently are missing the point: If Gwartney is rightfully controversial, then that controversy has to land at Otter’s doorstep.

As director of administration, even if only for a dollar a year (as the reports say), Gwartney reports directly to Otter. Otter can overrule anything he does. He serves at “the pleasure of” the governor – the governor can fire him at any time, for any reason or none. Whatever he does, good or bad, isn’t his own alone; the buck stops with Otter.

Witness here part of the problem that arises with hiring friends, even friends with good reputations. When your scribe started reporting on the Idaho Legislature in the mid-70s, Gwartney was among the members of the House (Otter had just left that chamber), and he was among the more highly-regarded of legislators. He often showed up in reporter lists of the better legislators.

He’s been away from all that for quite a while, though. A speculation: In his years in business at Boise Boise Cascade and the Farmers and Merchants Bank, and no doubt through lots of talks with the libertarian Otter, he may have come to think that government could work better if it were run much as those businesses were. But government doesn’t run like business, and that’s a good thing. They’re different animals. They function in different ways.

So you get quotes like one from Senator Dean Cameron, R-Rupert, as budget committee chair no stranger to dealing with many sorts of state executives, complaining about “the imperialistic attitude Mr. Gwartney brings to a lot of the projects he does.”

You get a whole string of battles on a wide range of fronts, poor legislative relations and at least one major lawsuit, all in areas where Gwartney has been directly involved. And a Gwartney now seemingly holed up in his office while a clamor for his resignation has been starting to kick in outside.

That falls to Otter, Gwartney’s boss as well as his friend, as the governor launches his bid for re-election. Damage to Otter is being done; however much some Republican office holders may want to point a finger at Gwartney, it has to come back around to Otter. What we will see soon is what Otter and Gwartney decide to do about it within the confines of friendship, and of politics. And of governing a state.

Not to harp too much on the Pocatello Tea Party, but this one was not to be missed.

The headline was “Ten Reasons Why We Need a State Militia Now.”

Here are the ten:

Attacks by international “terrorists”

Invasion by illegal immigrants

Infusions of illicit drugs

Depredations of criminal enterprises organized and operated on a global scale

Rampant domestic “gangster government” at the National, State and Local levels

The dragooning of America as a “global policeman” in the service of special-interest groups, both foreign and domestic

Schemes aimed at overthrowing the Declaration of Independence

Cultural subversion, corruption, and dissolution

The inherent instability and corruption of America’s monetary and banking systems

A staggering burden of governmental financial liabilities

Assuming you could figure out just how a state militia would solve all those problems, there’s just one left:

What do you do with the current Idaho militia – that is, the Idaho National Guard?

There are plenty of people in this country who are here illegally, and one effective way to get a handle on that would be to block their employment. So how far should legislators go in that direction?

In Idaho, there’s House Bill 497, backed by Representatives Phil Hart and Raul Labrador, and its statement of purpose says this: “If enacted, this legislation will allow for Idaho employers to have their state, county or city licenses suspended for knowingly employing illegal aliens. Professional licenses are excluded from the legislation. For a first offense, a license will be suspended until the employer signs an affidavit stating that the employer will not hire an unauthorized alien in the future. If the employer signs this affidavit within three (3) days of the court ruling, no suspension of the license will take place. For a second offense in a three (3) year period, the license will be suspended for up to ten (10) days. For a third offense in a three (3) year period, the license will be suspended for up to one year.”

The bill died in the House State Affairs Committee, after a motion by Representative Ken Andrus, R-Lava Hot Springs. The was followed by a blog post by the Pocatello Tea Party headlined, “Tar & Feather Rep. Andrus.” (It was a predecessor to the post, “Tar & Feather Rep. Elaine Smith; her sin had to do with the law on midwives.)

So what does Andrus have to say for himself? Well, this:

HB497 would require an employer’s license to be revoked for up to one year. I do not know the economic impact to the construction, motel and restaurant industries, but I have some experience and knowledge in agriculture. I have employed one or more foreign born workers, continuously, for more than 25 years. I have never illegally hired a worker. It is wrong. I do not condone hiring illegals – period.

Consider the consequence of an employer’s license being revoked for one year. Most agricultural employers operate under a partnership, corporation or LLC license. If the license is suddenly revoked, do the county commissioners or sheriff now come in and take over the farm or ranch and the owner (or former owner) take his family and go to a homeless shelter for sustenance? If a dairyman unexpectedly loses his license and is shut down, who now milks the cows (which may number more than a thousand on some dairies) – the humane society, to relieve pressure and pain in the udder and keep them from getting mastitis? These are realistic scenarios and no answer was given when I asked the question in the committee hearing.

It’s called thinking through the effects.

Time to prepare for breaking out the D-word?

The northwest’s snowpack seemed to be in pretty good shape two to three months ago. Less so now, and in places it could get pretty parched.

Only one spot in the Northwest has higher than normal accumulated precipitation: The Olympic peninsula (at about 151%). Other than that, it’s a question how relatively dry are you?

Th driest river basins (compared with the percentage four months ago in parentheses):

Washington: Spokane 65% (was 94%), Lower Snake 67% (was 103%), Upper Yakima (was 74%)

Oregon: Klamath 71% (was 74%), Hood/Sandy/Lower Deschutes 72% (was 101%), Rogue/Umpqua 74% (was 85%), Willamette 74% (was 103%).

Idaho: Henry’s Fork/Teton 60% (was 88%), Snake River above Palisades 61% (was ), Clearwater 62% (was ), Spokane 65% (was 94%), Salmon 68% (was 89%), Willow/Blackfoot/Portneuf 69% (was 73%).

Probably doesn’t feel that way right now to the Boise advocates – Mayor David Bieter among them – of a downtown streetcar, but in denying federal money to the city for that project, the feds may have done those advocates a big favor.

This marks the opportunity, which maybe some of them have been quietly hoping for, to back off.

No doubt Bieter was very serious about creating such a project; it would much change the look and feel of Boise’s downtown, and some positives likely would have come of it. But the questions about how and why it would work, and whether it was the right priority for the area, were almost overwhelming. We’ve been struck by the number of Boiseans who have been long-time passionate supporters of mass transit who could not see their way to supporting this one, even if most of the money for it was federal. Polling suggests that Boiseans overall are highly skeptical.

Streetcars are not necessarily a bad idea. Portland has a good streetcar system (linked to its light rail and bus operations), and picked up $23.2 million today for its program. Tucson and Dallas got money for streetcars too.

And for now at least, Boise city officials indicated they won’t be giving up.

But they may be well advised to see today’s decision as an opportunity to take a pause, step back, and rethink.